You Brits are gonna love the New Freedom and Safety

[Guiscard]

Which policy are you talking about? How did it specifically contribute to the growth of the insurgency/terrorist activity?

Perhaps fostering the creation of and arming an insurgency in Afghanistan to fight the Russians? Thought that one was fairly obvious!

[DangerBoy]

5) Show me any link that says 23,000 terrorists,as opposed to insurgents,have been killed.

I'm not making the distinction between them. If they want to kill us they are our enemy. You can take the time to give them a proper designation if you want, but I'd rather spend my time rejoicing that they will never again have the ability to murder innocent people or anyone else. For me that's like saying we should distinguish between killing the SS, the Hitler youth, or Brown Shirts. All 3 groups wanted to kill allied troops.

In Iraq, 19,429 dead. Maybe this is what ricky was talking about when he gave that number. I was counting Iraq & Afghanistan.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/ne ... 27.art.htm

In Afghanistan, more than 3,500 dead according to the AP.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... istan.html

Of course, I already know that after reading these 2 stories people against the war on terror will focus on the negatives of these stories instead of being happy that these murderers are dead.

Now I'd like to see your proof that there were no terrorists in Iraq, including Zarqawi, before the US went in there to depose Hussein.

[DangerBoy]

I'd be curious to know how DangerBoy would demonstrate that Iraq was less stable before the invasion. The mind boggles...

I'd be curious if you actually viewed the entire video I posted a link to which explains that at the end. The mind only boggles when you don't consider anything other than left wing propaganda.

[Neutrino]

How do you know they are murderers? The majority of them will be people who are just really, really pissed off the US blew up the majority of their country. They are fighting for what they see is right, just as the US soldiers are (though pay is also a consideration there). If you term Afghani and Iraqi insurgents "murderers" then you must do the same to US troops.

Would you rebel if the US was somehow occupied?

[Guiscard]

I'm not making the distinction between them. If they want to kill us they are our enemy. You can take the time to give them a proper designation if you want, but I'd rather spend my time rejoicing that they will never again have the ability to murder innocent people or anyone else. For me that's like saying we should distinguish between killing the SS, the Hitler youth, or Brown Shirts. All 3 groups wanted to kill allied troops.

The sad thing in your lack of distinction between terrorist and insurgent is that, for the most part, the guys you're fighting on the streets of Baghdad were not the ones flying planes into the WTC. They just want the occupying foreigner to get the f*ck out of their country (and note I'm not making any judgments here - I'm not in favour of a mass pull-out by any means). The problem is that this ridiculous attitude of the two sides 'Freedom' vs 'Evil Terrorists" is so un-applicable to the situation on the ground, and so harmful to the general security and stability of the world we live in that it really is a major issue for me. The Muslims in the US and the UK who would not for one minute identify with the 9/11 bombers may well feel sympathetic towards those they see as fighting for the freedom of their country from Western control. We can't win the hearts and minds of the potential fundamentalists on our doorstep with such a polarised attitude. 'Us against Them' will leave us both in flames.

[DangerBoy]

How do you know they are murderers?

Because they admit to it

"I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew, Daniel Pearl...for those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head." - Al Queda member Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

"O young people of Islam: Follow the orders of Almighty God and His messenger and kill those people. Follow the example of Muhammad Bin-Musallamah and his companions. Death is better than living on this earth with the unbelievers amongst us, making a mockery of our religion and prophet, God's peace and blessings upon him. Fear God, try to please Him, and do not consult with anyone regarding the killing of those unbelievers." - Osama Bin Laden

"Let the entire world hear me. Our hostility to the Great Satan is absolute. … I conclude my speech with the slogan that will continue to reverberate on all occasions so that nobody will think that we have weakened. Regardless of how the world has changed after 11 September, Death to America will remain our reverberating and powerful slogan: Death to America." - Hezbollah Leader Nasrallah

You're asking me to qualify my beliefs. Can you provide me with quotes that where Al Queda or other terrorist groups say they do not believe in murder?

[Guiscard]

How do you know they are murderers?

Because they admit to it

"I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew, Daniel Pearl...for those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head." - Al Queda member Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

"O young people of Islam: Follow the orders of Almighty God and His messenger and kill those people. Follow the example of Muhammad Bin-Musallamah and his companions. Death is better than living on this earth with the unbelievers amongst us, making a mockery of our religion and prophet, God's peace and blessings upon him. Fear God, try to please Him, and do not consult with anyone regarding the killing of those unbelievers." - Osama Bin Laden

"Let the entire world hear me. Our hostility to the Great Satan is absolute. … I conclude my speech with the slogan that will continue to reverberate on all occasions so that nobody will think that we have weakened. Regardless of how the world has changed after 11 September, Death to America will remain our reverberating and powerful slogan: Death to America." - Hezbollah Leader Nasrallah

You're asking me to qualify my beliefs. Can you provide me with quotes that where Al Queda say they do not believe in murder?

You do realise neither Osama Bin Laden. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed nor Hezbollah are Iraqi insurgents, right?

Or are you completely blinkered in your view of the world outside of Fox...

[DangerBoy]

I'm sorry guys. I forgot how the left views these guys trying to kill us. They're not murderers at all.

“The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win.” - Michael Moore

No wonder I can't convince you guys.

[Guiscard]

I'm sorry guys. I forgot how the left views these guys trying to kill us. They're not murderers at all.

“The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win.” - Michael Moore

No wonder I can't convince you guys.

No. They are an insurgency, and they do kill. Some are murderers and some bomb and kill hundreds of innocent women and children.

We're not putting Iraqi insurgents up on some pedastool or saying that we sympathise 100% are rooting for them to 'win', as it were.

Far from it.

It just that you seem to see the issue from a ridiculously clouded viewpoint where everyone outside the west hate the US because of your 'freedom' and want to destroy and burn every inch of US soil. That bis entirely wrong.

The majority of insurgents will simply be fighting against what they see as an foreign occupation imposing themselves upon THEIR culture and religion, and killing THEIR families through indiscriminate fire, through trigger-happy mercenary companies who are not answerable to any law court and they see torture in their prisons and foreign troops on their streets. There would be no doubt that the same thing would happen in any country. It doesn't make suicide bombings in Iraqi markets right, not at all, but the refusal to entertain any idea of our contribution to the problem, how our policies exasperate the violence or consider viable alternatives is a scary position, and one you exemplify nicely.

it took us decades over here to broker peace in Northern Ireland. Too many people died when we thought that harsh policing was the way to go. You take losses and you learn to adapt, else you take worse losses. Thats the way it goes.

[DangerBoy]

It just that you seem to see the issue from a ridiculously clouded viewpoint where everyone outside the west hate the US because of your 'freedom' and want to destroy and burn every inch of US soil. That bis entirely wrong.

I don't believe that. I'm going to ask this again - has anybody taken the time to actually watch the entire video I posted a link to?

The majority of insurgents will simply be fighting against what they see as an foreign occupation imposing themselves upon THEIR culture and religion, and killing THEIR families through indiscriminate fire, through trigger-happy mercenary companies who are not answerable to any law court and they see torture in their prisons and foreign troops on their streets.

Ok, how do you know that the majority of the insurgents take that point of view? Was there a poll conducted proving that this is the main motivation?

[Guiscard]

Ok, how do you know that the majority of the insurgents take that point of view? Was there a poll conducted proving that this is the main motivation?

Because it is so fucking obvious if you look at ANY insurgency pretty much ever!

Perhaps best illustrated through the wonders of Hip-Hop with Immortal Technique:

They say the rebels in Iraq still fight for Saddam
But that's bullshit, I'll show you why it's totally wrong
Cuz if another country invaded the hood tonight
It'd be warfare through Harlem, and Washington Heights
I wouldn't be fightin' for Bush or White America's dream
I'd be fightin' for my people's survival and self-esteem
I wouldn't fight for racist churches from the south, my nigga
I'd be fightin' to keep the occupation out, my nigga
You ever clock someone who talk shit, or look at you wrong?
Imagine if they shot at you, and was rapin' your moms

People fight because there are troops on their home soil. They fight because they want to rule in their way, be it democratically, through the suppression of all the other groups through military means... They may want to win power to suppress another sect, or to impost stricter religious standards... I'm not judging them in any positive light. I've just saying that to say they are fighting an insurgency because they hate America and everything it apparently stands for is quite obviously wrong. There are a million viewpoints and potentially a million ways of dealing with the situation. We are not at war. We are an occupying force.

[DangerBoy]

Ok, how do you know that the majority of the insurgents take that point of view? Was there a poll conducted proving that this is the main motivation?

Because it is so fucking obvious if you look at ANY insurgency pretty much ever!

So I get raked over the coals and asked to provide proof for my points, but when I ask for proof from the other side all I get is "it's obvious". Can you understand how frustrating that is for people who support the war effort to argue with people who don't support it?

For the record, I thought your point about peace in N. Ireland was good. Maybe I'm coming off as a little aggressive against you and gottonkaed. You've got to admit though Guiscard, that when I'm demanded to provide proof and do it to the best I know how it's frustrating to get a counterpoint that simply says "it's obvious" without any citations.

[Guiscard]

So I get raked over the coals and asked to provide proof for my points, but when I ask for proof from the other side all I get is "it's obvious". Can you understand how frustrating that is for people who support the war effort to argue with people who don't support it?

For the record, I thought your point about peace in N. Ireland was good. Maybe I'm coming off as a little aggressive against you and gottonkaed. You've got to admit though Guiscard, that when I'm demanded to provide proof and do it to the best I know how it's frustrating to get a counterpoint that simply says "it's obvious" without any citations.

Why don't I support the war effort? Does support mean a blind and unquestioning acceptance of current policy? No. I support 100% the drive to achieve a peaceful and independent Iraq, and if (at this stage) it is through military means then I support that too. We're in there, we've fucked up these peoples lives and fucked up their country and we need to sort it out. I believe that very strongly. We need to make sure Iraq doesn't dissolve into civil war, but we don't necessarily chave to do that in the way we are at the moment.

And secondly... Well if you really must read some sort of source...

http://globalpolicy.igc.org/security/is ... erview.htm

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/is ... 6rebel.htm

http://bostonreview.net/BR29.5/hashim.html

These will pehaps serve to illustrate how divided the motivations and (potential post-victory) aims of the various and disparate insurgent groups.

[DangerBoy]

So I get raked over the coals and asked to provide proof for my points, but when I ask for proof from the other side all I get is "it's obvious". Can you understand how frustrating that is for people who support the war effort to argue with people who don't support it?

For the record, I thought your point about peace in N. Ireland was good. Maybe I'm coming off as a little aggressive against you and gottonkaed. You've got to admit though Guiscard, that when I'm demanded to provide proof and do it to the best I know how it's frustrating to get a counterpoint that simply says "it's obvious" without any citations.

Why don't I support the war effort? Does support mean a blind and unquestioning acceptance of current policy? No. I support 100% the drive to achieve a peaceful and independent Iraq, and if (at this stage) it is through military means then I support that too. We're in there, we've fucked up these peoples lives and fucked up their country and we need to sort it out. I believe that very strongly. We need to make sure Iraq doesn't dissolve into civil war, but we don't necessarily chave to do that in the way we are at the moment.

And secondly... Well if you really must read some sort of source...

http://globalpolicy.igc.org/security/is ... erview.htm

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/is ... 6rebel.htm

http://bostonreview.net/BR29.5/hashim.html

These will pehaps serve to illustrate how divided the motivations and (potential post-victory) aims of the various and disparate insurgent groups.

Thank you. I will read all 3 articles.

Here's what I've been sifting through for the past week.

http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

I also want to say that I never quoted Fox News on anything I've presented so far. I think it's unfair to make that charge against me.

[Guiscard]

Thank you. I will read all 3 articles.

Here's what I've been sifting through for the past week.

http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

Its a good source, but just skip to the polls section for evidence of exactly what I mean.

59% currently think the US government controls things, and 80% think they will never withdraw militarily. 79% want a strong government who would get rid of the militias but 61% approve of attacks on US forces. I know everything after the figures is interpretation, but doesn't that tell you something? They want self-rule and they don't like the American occupation... Whats more likely? That motivation or the pure hatred of American values trotted out in Whitehouse rhetoric.

[DangerBoy]

Thank you. I will read all 3 articles.

Here's what I've been sifting through for the past week.

http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

Its a good source, but just skip to the polls section for evidence of exactly what I mean.

59% currently think the US government controls things, and 80% think they will never withdraw militarily. 79% want a strong government who would get rid of the militias but 61% approve of attacks on US forces. I know everything after the figures is interpretation, but doesn't that tell you something? They want self-rule and they don't like the American occupation... Whats more likely? That motivation or the pure hatred of American values trotted out in Whitehouse rhetoric.

I'm going to read the whole thing. There's good and bad there. What I hate is when people will only pick out the bad. I just finished your 1st article.

[joecoolfrog]

Danger boy
Seriously if another country invaded yours ( for whatever reason) and you fought against them,then would you be a terrorist ?

Secondly if you do view everybody who takes up arms against the USA as a terrorist then you are conceeding the point that the invasion of Iraq has increased the amount of terrorists, are you not

The reason that I find your views so alarming is that you are attempting to boil a complicated situation down to a simple pro/anti USA equation when it is far more complicated than that. To view everybody who questions the war as a Liberal appeaser is simplistic and dumb, if ever Bush thought that Iraq was going to help in his 'war on terror' then he knows better now as does everybody else who has viewed the last 5 years objectively.
,

[Guiscard]

The reason that I find your views so alarming is that you are attempting to boil a complicated situation down to a simple pro/anti USA equation when it is far more complicated than that. To view everybody who questions the war as a Liberal appeaser is simplistic and dumb, if ever Bush thought that Iraq was going to help in his 'war on terror' then he knows better now as does everybody else who has viewed the last 5 years objectively.
,

This is what I've been trying to say for six posts... Dangerboy, you've yet to address this point at all.

[DangerBoy]

The reason that I find your views so alarming is that you are attempting to boil a complicated situation down to a simple pro/anti USA equation when it is far more complicated than that. To view everybody who questions the war as a Liberal appeaser is simplistic and dumb, if ever Bush thought that Iraq was going to help in his 'war on terror' then he knows better now as does everybody else who has viewed the last 5 years objectively.
,

This is what I've been trying to say for six posts... Dangerboy, you've yet to address this point at all.

A basic point that joecoolfrog and others make is that I'm boiling this down to simplistic terms. Isn't it just as simplistic to charge me with only looking at the world through the eyes of Fox News? I still haven't heard anyone admit that it was wrong to charge me with that even though I never quoted them once when presenting my views. I'm not saying that anyone who disagrees with the war is an appeaser. What I'm basically saying is that people who don't like President Bush will constantly criticize and don't care about ANY good news coming out of there. There's lots of good things happening there that you guys are refusing to acknowledge.
People against the war also try to say that they are the ones who are critical thinkers, but if you disagree then you are simplistic.

Now I gave you a link to the study I'm reading. It gives BOTH the good and the bad. Since I'm taking the time to read everything there I would say I'm trying to get as much information as possible, not a simplistic defense of the war. How many liberals can make the same claim? Liberals do the same thing that you are all accusing me of doing - blind obedience to talking points which have been refuted.

So there are different titles given to people who have the SAME OBJECTIVE - to kill, murder, torture, behead. If they want peace, then talk it over or elect representatives, stop killing.

I'll ask again - has anybody viewed the ENTIRE video link that I posted showing Saddam Hussein's victims. It was hardly a stable environment to be living in.

I'm in between classes now. I haven't finished your 3rd article yet cause I went to bed after reading the 1st two.

[Norse]

DangerBoy, what you must realise about these drones, is that they see it from all sides of their own arguement...

Just remember

Bigot - "A person who wins an argument with a liberal”

Oh what bigots we are.

[got tonkaed]

DangerBoy, what you must realise about these drones, is that they see it from all sides of their own arguement...

Just remember

Bigot - "A person who wins an argument with a liberal”

Oh what bigots we are.

well since youve never won one....i highly doubt we can level so serious a charge.

[Norse]

DangerBoy, what you must realise about these drones, is that they see it from all sides of their own arguement...

Just remember

Bigot - "A person who wins an argument with a liberal”

Oh what bigots we are.

well since youve never won one....i highly doubt we can level so serious a charge.

Dont be silly...every time I have the displeasure of talking to you rotters, I come away with a feather in my cap.

[got tonkaed]

DangerBoy, what you must realise about these drones, is that they see it from all sides of their own arguement...

Just remember

Bigot - "A person who wins an argument with a liberal”

Oh what bigots we are.

well since youve never won one....i highly doubt we can level so serious a charge.

Dont be silly...every time I have the displeasure of talking to you rotters, I come away with a feather in my cap.

you can put feathers in your cap all you want....if we are going to talk about winning arguments you still havent won any.

[Norse]

Tonkaed...your 2 posts here capture the spirit of you and your ilks arguements perfectly.

I rest my case

If you would like to take this any further, I suggest you create another thread, as Im already on 2 warnings, and dont want to be on a 3rd for thread-jacking.

[got tonkaed]

Tonkaed...your 2 posts here capture the spirit of you and your ilks arguements perfectly.

I rest my case

If you would like to take this any further, I suggest you create another thread, as Im already on 2 warnings, and dont want to be on a 3rd for thread-jacking.

fair enough ill leave it be as i suppose this doesnt need to be jacked completly